Satellite communications systems are becoming ubiquitous for communicating large amounts of data over large geographic regions. In typical satellite communications systems, end consumers interface with the systems through user terminals. The user terminals communicate, via one or more satellites, with one or more gateways. The gateways may then process and route the data to and from one or more networks according to various network protocols and tags processed at the network layer and above (e.g., layers 3 and above of the Open System Interconnection Reference Model (OSI) stack). While utilizing higher layers to route communications may provide certain features, such as enhanced interoperability, it may also limit certain capabilities of the network. For example, routing limits the types of tags that can persist across multiple sub-networks.
Presently, gateways in satellite networks are configured to support a number of services and perform a variety of network functions. For example, gateways perform IP Routing protocols, Layer-3 redundancy schemes, acceleration, AAA/Radius services (i.e., terminal registration on the network), DHCP/DNS, trivial file transfer protocol (TFTP), network time protocol (NTP), public key encryption (PKI), and the like. Such gateways are expensive to build and maintain. Furthermore, the services and functionality offered by these gateways are isolated to the customers for which the gateway specifically service. Many gateways providing the same or similar services and must be maintained in parallel in order to provide service to an entire customer base over a large geographical area.
Further, current implementations of satellite networks fail to provide the services and functionality at layer-2 (i.e., layer-2 of the OSI-model stack) communicating from one point on the network to another. Additionally, current implementations of satellite networks only provide redundancy within the gateway. For example, current satellite network implementations may provide redundant access to a points on the network (i.e., multiple fiber lines to a gateway such that if one line is compromised, service still continues over the second line); however, if, for example, the gateway itself is down (or a service of the gateway), there is currently no way for another gateway to continue to provide the service (or services) of a failed gateway.
Current gateway implementations typically communicate over layer-3 or “layer-2.5” (i.e., multi-protocol label switching (MPLS)). As such, networks using only layer-3 or layer-2.5 are limited in the services and network configurations that can be offered. For example, an MPLS network may be deployed using RFC-2547 which is MPLS that redistributes routes using border gateway protocol (BGP). Accordingly, such a deployment includes a layer-3 network over an MPLS underlying network, so each core node or gateway is routed (i.e., the MAC header of packets transmitted are altered), thus limiting the capabilities of the network.
Additionally, in current mobile IP implementations each mobile device is identified by its home address (i.e., at the mobile device's home agent) regardless of the mobile's device's current location. While the mobile device is away from its home network, the mobile device is assigned a care-of address. The care-of address identifies the mobile device's current location. The care-of address acts as a local endpoint of a tunnel back to the mobile device's home agent, and the home address. As such, mobile IP specifies how the mobile device registers with its home agent and how the home agent routes data to the mobile device through the tunnel (between the home argent and the care-of address).
Mobile IP has significant drawbacks. One drawback is that the when the mobile device moves out of its home location, the mobile device's care-of address is a virtual address. Hence, moving out of the home location requires a hand off, which changes the mobile device's IP address by adding a care-of-address. This is particularly problematic in IPv4 networks (e.g., connectivity is temporarily lost, browser session is lost, VPN session is lost, etc.). In many applications (e.g., VPN, VoIP), sudden changes in network connectivity and IP address causes significant problems. For example, an SSL tunnel for on-line banking will terminate. Furthermore, the tunnel between the home address and the care-of address is a layer-3 protocol, and as such, the as the mobile device moves out of its home location the mobile device is no longer connected to the same network (i.e., LAN, subnet, etc.). Additionally, traffic must be routed through the home agent location. For example, if the mobile device and the data the mobile device is accessing are at the same remote location, the data must travel all the way to the home agent location and then circle back to the remote location, thus greatly increasing latency. Accordingly, current mobile IP implementations fail to provide a persistent IP address and persistent connectivity and efficient data transfer over a large geographical area. For these and/or other reasons, it may be desirable to provide ground-segment networking with enhanced functionality.